Find a Lawyer

ZAKIUDDIN AHMAD SIDDIQUI versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, ISLAMABAD

Article 17 Constitution of Pakistan Constitution 199 Constitutional Petition Intervention of Tenant Removal Truths Intervention Principal Rent Controller Nailswell Lower Appellate Court Approves Withdrawal Based on Default Payment of Monthly Rent and Personal Use Accuracy Against Tenant Do it. The constitutional jurisdiction refuses to interfere in any matter of fact unless it is established that the fact finding by the courts below is the result of misrepresentation or reading of evidence or misleading, confusing or forfeited rent. Cedar failed to show that a false advertisement had occurred. Or even reading the evidence from the tenants below the tenant could not establish that the constitutional petition by the two courts below was construed to dismiss the constitutional petition \ r \ n \ r \ n

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011

• ALI ASGHAR v. State 2011 PCrLJ 641
• Syed ABBAS HUSSAIN NAQVI v. GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Secretary Auqaf, Lahore 2011 CLC 645
• Ch. MUHAMMAD ASLAM v. Sirdar AHMAD NAWAZ SUKHERA 2011 YLR 647
• Mst. SHAZIA BIBI v. State 2011 MLD 648
• SHAHID HUSSAIN v. State 2011 PCrLJ 652
• ADAM KHAN v. State 2011 YLR 654
• MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE v. GHULAM RASOOL 2011 CLC 661
• Mst. ZAIB-UN-NISA v. REHMAT 2011 PCrLJ 666

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2011 →

top advocate from Lahore lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes